The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures

Josiah Royce And The Spirit Of Philosophy

Josiah Royce (1855 -- 1916)is a philosopher from the "golden age" of American philosophy, which also includes William James, Charles Peirce, and John Dewey. These four thinkers mutually influenced one another. Royce has been the least-known of the four due to the idealistic character of much of his work. I have been reading and learning from Royce for several years. In anticipation of the upcoming 100th anniversary of Royce's death, I decided to read this early book of Royce's, "The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures", published in 1892. I also wanted to read this book for Royce's consideration of Spinoza, a philosopher he discusses at some length in the volume.

The book originated as a series of lectures Royce gave over several years in different places to non-specialist audiences. Royce aimed to describe in a non-technical way the nature and origins of different important strands of philosophical thinking. The book is written for the mythical "general reader" in Royce's day and our own. It is a delight to read, in a late 19th century style, with many telling anecdotes of the author and of the philosophers he discusses, and extensive and effective use of literary and musical allusions. The book still is daunting to read and an important work in its own right. "Modern" philosophy, for Royce in 1892 was the philosophy between Kant and Schopenhauer, extending to the theory of evolution and its philosophical treatment which was then only beginning. Thus, the book does not treat the rise of "modern" analytic philosophy in the works of, say Russell and Moore including, specifically, their critiques of idealism. Royce would gain some familiarity with these works late in his life. This early book also does not reflect the influence the different pragmatisms of Royce's friends, James and Peirce, would soon exert on Royce.

The book is both an admittedly selective history of modern philosophy and a development of a philosophical position. Royce at the outset states his commitment to the position of philosophical idealism; and he presents his history and his own philosophical views from that perspective. He writes:

"What I am really pleading for, as you will see in the sequel, is a form of philosophic reflection that leads to a very definite and positive theory of the universe itself, the theory, namely, which I have just suggested, a theory not at all mystical in its methods, nor yet, in its results, really opposed to the postulates of science, or to the deeper meaning at the heart of common sense. This theory is that the whole universe, including the physical world, also, is essentially one live thing, a mind, one great Spirit, infinitely wealthier in his experiences than we are, but for that very reason to be comprehended by us only in terms of our own wealthiest experience."

The book is in two large parts. In the first part, "Studies of Thinkers and Problems", Royce examines the history of modern philosophy. In the second part, "Suggestions of Doctrine", Royce uses what he takes to be the best lessons of the philosophical history to develop his own position. Royce tries to be a synthesizer. His goal is to show the harmony between science and the theory of evolution on the one hand and a spiritual, religious view of life on the other hand. Royce was certainly not the last philosopher to be worried about this relationship and to attempt a harmonization.

There are many wonderful insights in this book. For me, the most penetrating discussions occur in Royce's "General Introduction" and in his opening chapter on Spinoza. In the introduction, Royce offers his views on the nature and importance of philosophical, critical and reflective thinking. He stresses at the outset the importance of temperament. He stresses that no single philosophical system will win the adherence of all persons and that systems change with time although some basic contours remain constant. Royce thus is aware of the value of difference and seeming conflict in different philosophies, including both idealism and naturalism. He is fully aware as well of the importance of passion and the search for meaning in philosophy and in life -- this in contrast to many critics of Royce from his own day forward. The opening introduction is worth pondering and re-reading as one works through the rest of the book.

I was intrigued that Royce begins his historical study with Spinoza rather than with Descartes, as is almost universally done. Royce states that the emphasis of the cogito in Descartes obscures the naturalistic character of the first period of modern philosophy, including Descartes himself. Royce finds this naturalistic strand, with it combined religious form best expressed in the philosophy of Spinoza. In his short treatment, Royce offers an insightful portrait of Spinoza and a non-technical description of his thought which considers both its scientific and its mystical aspects. Royce tends to be more interested in religion. He sees Spinoza as attempting his own form of union with God or nature rather than as seeing religion as a source of divine commands or challenges. Royce also points out how in his doctrine of "substance", Spinoza saw reality under two aspects, body and mind. As I read through the book, I thought Spinoza's own double aspect theory had many similarities, and perhaps some advantages over, the "double-aspect" theory of philosophical idealism that Royce himself develops in the second part of his work.

Royce proceeds to consider the British empiricists, followed by a lengthy discussion of Kant and his German idealistic successors, Fichte, Hegel, and Schopenhauer. Royce's expositions of these difficult thinkers are clear and informative and they are enhanced by his brief biographical observations. The period between Kant and Hegel was not much studied in American philosophy departments when I was in college. The exposition of these thinkers, Hegel in particular, taught me a great deal. The discussion of Hegel still could be read as an introduction to his aims and his thinking.

In the second part of the book, Royce, deeply influenced by Kant, argues for a form of philosophical idealism that avoids the romantic excesses of Kant's successors. As mentioned above, he argues for a form of objective idealism in which every person and thing is part of an all-inclusive world soul or logos. He draws a distinction between what he calls the world of description and the world of appreciation -- the former the world of science, the latter the world of spirits each part of the world-spirit. This discussion will not be persuasive to most contemporary readers. As Royce suggests in the introduction to the book, it is more important to understand what Royce was trying to do and why than to agree with the specific idealistic formulation of the book. It offers many insights. The book brought me back to Spinoza's formulation of issues and the way it agrees with and differs from Royce. Other readers will find other possible approaches to the questions. In the final chapter of the book, Royce addresses the religious problem of evil in the context of his idealism. This is a question Royce would explore several times during his career.

Royce and this book are not often studied today but there has been some recent resurgence of interest in the great American idealist thinker. The book is worth reading for its history, for its issues, and as an introduction to Royce. Although Royce wrote the book for a non-specialist audience, the book today will appeal more to readers with a strong background and interest in philosophy who are willing to explore a now somewhat obscure and undervalued American thinker. I was fortunate to read this book in a hardback edition published in 1955.

Robin Friedman